DOCSLIB.ORG

Please Click Here to Read the Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Please Click Here to Read the Report Hrant Dink Foundation Halaskargazi Cad. Sebat Apt. No. 74 D. 1 Osmanbey-Şişli 34371 Istanbul/TURKEY Phone: 0212 240 33 61 Fax: 0212 240 33 94 E-mail: [email protected] www.nefretsoylemi.org www.hrantdink.org Media Watch on Hate Speech Project Coordinators Nuran Gelişli Melisa Akan Analyst Ceyda Ulukaya Translator Nigar Hacızade Media Watch on Hate Speech Project is funded by Global Dialogue, Friedrich Naumann Foundation, and the British Embassy. The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the funders. CONTENTS MONITORING HATE SPEECH IN THE MEDIA 1 MONITORING HATE SPEECH IN NATIONAL AND LOCAL NEWSPAPERS IN TURKEY 2 FINDINGS 4 NEWS ITEMS SELECTED IN THE PERIOD MAY – AUGUST 2012 14 EXAMPLES WITHIN CATEGORIES 24 1)ENMITY/ WAR DISCOURSE THE PKK IS AN ARMENIAN TERROIST MOVEMENT 24 WHAT HAPPENS IF THE KURDISH PEOPLE STEP ASIDE? 26 HRANT DINK FOUNDATION AND THE HATE TRADE 28 2) SYMBOLIZATION SEPERATISM BY RAKEL DINK 30 YES TO CEASAREAN SECTION! ABORTION WILL DEPEND 32 3) BLASPHEMY/ INSULT/ DENIGRATION THE SOLUTION IN CYPRUS IS TO FULLY EMBRACE TRNC 34 4) EXAGERRATION/ ATTRIBUTION/ DISTORTION THEY HAVE TURNED TURKEY INTO A CHURCH 36 OTHER DISADVANTAGED GROUPS 37 A MIND ECLIPSE (1): LEGITIMIZING (!) AND DEFENDING (?) A LIFE STYLE THAT HAS DECLARED WAR ON HUMAN NATURE AND PROGENY 38 IF I SIGHED (CHOCOLATE WITH A VIBRATOR) 40 TRANSSEXUAL AND TRANSVESTITE FIGHT WITH A CLEAVER 41 MEDIA CRITICISM 43 SÖZCÜ’S CALL FOR REVENGE: STOP CRYING, DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY 43 YOUR BODY, MY DECISION... 46 YENI AKIT AND HABERVAKTIM TO JOURNALISTS: PRO-DPI, PRO-PKK, PRO-ARMENIAN 48 Hate Speech in the Media: May-August 2012 MONITORING HATE SPEECH IN THE MEDIA In Turkey, we frequently witness the use of biased, prejudiced and discriminatory language in the media. The provocative, racist and discriminatory language used in the news - in particular in the headline and news headings - becomes an instrument that entrenches stereotypes and fuels feelings of hostility and discrimination in the society. Despite the fact that there are universal and national principles of journalism and that some media organizations have even issued their own code of ethics, many journalistic end products happen to violate these principles. The use of such a language entrenches unrest in the society as well as a widespread prejudice against vulnerable groups. Targeted individuals and groups become restless and silent and are forced to renounce from their right to participate in social and political life, something which is a sine qua non for democracy. Such provocative and stigmatizing use of language can sometimes result in attacks on the members or gathering places of marginalized and antagonized groups. At the core of hate speech lie prejudices, racism, xenophobia, partiality, discrimination, sexism and homophobia. Factors such as cultural identities as well as group characteristics have an impact on the use of hate speech; yet certain circumstances such as rising nationalism or intolerance towards what is different further increases hate speech as well as its impact. Due to various reasons, Turkey has been witnessing polarization between various segments of the society; thus intolerance towards the different, the “other” is becoming more and more widespread. Conflicts in the Southeast Anatolia ongoing for about 30 years, the sudden demographic change in Turkey caused by forced displacement of people due to the conflict, as well as the economic, social and cultural conflicts have all played role in the escalation of tension between communities. On the other hand, democratization efforts such as the initiatives in minority rights and liberal economy as well as the way the Cyprus Question debate is perceived and portrayed as “plots on Turkey by foreign powers” also nurture polarization and enmity. Finally, the ongoing debate about laicism has already turned into a common domain of conflict. Hence, the manifestation of hostile perceptions and attitudes towards different groups and individuals, who are known or assumed to be members of such groups, has become an important and ever-growing problem in Turkey. Even opinion leaders such as government officials, opposition leaders and public servants have no qualms when it comes to using such racist and discriminating language. As one may recall, right before the 2005 Conference on Ottoman Armenians during the Decline of the Empire: Issues of Scientific Responsibility and Democracy, the Justice Minister of the time, Cemil Çiçek, had stated that conference organizers were “stabbing us in the back”' and had called for “whatever necessary is to be done”. Media, often dubbed as the fourth estate, is one of the most effective cultural conductors. Therefore, as much as it has the power to highlight diversity and difference, it can also be extremely instrumental and guiding in terms of spreading or banalizing a conflict. If the media behaves irresponsible or careless, it can very easily trigger, nurture and strengthen racism and hatred between people, and worst of all, it can legitimize and justify such attitudes. For many years, the media in Turkey has been one of the active sources of nationalistic and discriminatory discourse. Such a journalism practice substantially contributed to the polarization in 1 Hate Speech in the Media: May-August 2012 society. When we look into some of the hate crimes that took place in recent years, it becomes easier to understand the impact of the media. Yasin Hayal, who is on trial as the instigator of the Hrant Dink murder, said in his statement that, “He did not know Hrant Dink personally, but had read from newspapers that he was an enemy of the Turks." The person who is accused of attacking the priest of the Church of St. Sophia in Izmir in December 2007 stated that he did the attack to become a hero like Ogün Samast. One of the main objectives of the Hrant Dink Foundation, which was founded after the murder of Hrant Dink for the purpose of carrying on his dreams, ideals and struggle, is to contribute to ending the polarization and enmity in society. MONITORING HATE SPEECH IN NATIONAL AND LOCAL NEWSPAPERS IN TURKEY Aim and scope of the study The overarching aim of the study Media Watch on Hate Speech is to contribute to combating racism, discrimination and intolerance in Turkey. Taking into account the importance of civilian oversight on the media, as one of the instruments for producing and reproducing racism, discrimination and alienation, the specific goal of this study is to foster newspapers’ respect for human rights and differences, draw attention to the discriminatory language and hate speech used in news articles and columns and thereby raise awareness and encourage the print media to stop using hate speech and discriminatory language. In the long run, the study aims to support non-governmental organizations in combating hate speech, enhancing media watch skills, and working together systematically to ensure that the media is respectful of social and cultural diversity and upholds equity in its language and methods. Within the framework of the “Media Watch on Hate Speech” - a project carried out by the Foundation so as to achieve the abovementioned goals - the national and local press are scanned, news articles and columns that feature discriminatory, alienating and target-making discourse are identified, analyzed and brought to public attention through reports and the website www.nefretsoylemi.org. The content provided on the project website is also shared through various social media, such as Facebook and Twitter. The report is sent to non-governmental organizations, media organizations and professional organizations, and also published on nefretsoylemi.org. Apart from monitoring of newspapers, the project aims at raising sensitivity about hate speech by organizing search conferences, seminars and trainings with NGO representatives, jurists, academics, professional organizations and journalists. Throughout the project, with a view to inform people about the concept of “hate speech”, to provide opportunities for discussion of possible ways and methods of countering discriminatory and racist discourse, and to encourage a more conscious and respectful language towards human rights issues and minorities in the media; we hold panel discussions in participation with internationally acclaimed academics working in the field, we organize meetings on hate speech in universities whereby project 2 Hate Speech in the Media: May-August 2012 findings are discussed based on specific cases. Furthermore, we make efforts so that there are lectures on hate speech, there are theses and dissertations that study hate speech and in line with these efforts, we are preparing a one-semester syllabus. Moreover, we also plan to publish a book that will feature the themes and subjects covered by the syllabus. Methodology While the main focus has been on hate speech based on ethnicity and religious identity, we have also included sexist and homophobic discourse in our media watch project. The media watch project has employed the critical discourse analysis method as well as some other associated techniques, which are the general method of choice in media studies. In line with the characteristics of the cases studied, textual and iconographic (photographs, pictures and other illustrations) analyses were carried out. With a view to designate specific indicators for the content and discourse of the news, a quantitative scaling has been used in the first place, followed by the exposure of the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Turkey's Deep State
    #1.12 PERSPECTIVES Political analysis and commentary from Turkey FEATURE ARTICLES TURKEY’S DEEP STATE CULTURE INTERNATIONAL POLITICS ECOLOGY AKP’s Cultural Policy: Syria: The Case of the Seasonal Agricultural Arts and Censorship “Arab Spring” Workers in Turkey Pelin Başaran Transforming into the Sidar Çınar Page 28 “Arab Revolution” Page 32 Cengiz Çandar Page 35 TURKEY REPRESENTATION Content Editor’s note 3 ■ Feature articles: Turkey’s Deep State Tracing the Deep State, Ayşegül Sabuktay 4 The Deep State: Forms of Domination, Informal Institutions and Democracy, Mehtap Söyler 8 Ergenekon as an Illusion of Democratization, Ahmet Şık 12 Democratization, revanchism, or..., Aydın Engin 16 The Near Future of Turkey on the Axis of the AKP-Gülen Movement, Ruşen Çakır 18 Counter-Guerilla Becoming the State, the State Becoming the Counter-Guerilla, Ertuğrul Mavioğlu 22 Is the Ergenekon Case an Opportunity or a Handicap? Ali Koç 25 The Dink Murder and State Lies, Nedim Şener 28 ■ Culture Freedom of Expression in the Arts and the Current State of Censorship in Turkey, Pelin Başaran 31 ■ Ecology Solar Energy in Turkey: Challenges and Expectations, Ateş Uğurel 33 A Brief Evaluation of Seasonal Agricultural Workers in Turkey, Sidar Çınar 35 ■ International Politics Syria: The Case of the “Arab Spring” Transforming into the “Arab Revolution”, Cengiz Çandar 38 Turkey/Iran: A Critical Move in the Historical Competition, Mete Çubukçu 41 ■ Democracy 4+4+4: Turning the Education System Upside Down, Aytuğ Şaşmaz 43 “Health Transformation Program” and the 2012 Turkey Health Panorama, Mustafa Sütlaş 46 How Multi-Faceted are the Problems of Freedom of Opinion and Expression in Turkey?, Şanar Yurdatapan 48 Crimes against Humanity and Persistent Resistance against Cruel Policies, Nimet Tanrıkulu 49 ■ News from hbs 53 Heinrich Böll Stiftung – Turkey Representation The Heinrich Böll Stiftung, associated with the German Green Party, is a legally autonomous and intellectually open political foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Annual Report
    U.S. Commission on InternationalUSCIRF Religious Freedom Annual Report 2012 Front Cover: Nearly 3,000 Egyptian mourners gather in central Cairo on October 13, 2011 in honor of Coptic Christians among 25 people killed in clashes during a demonstration over an attack on a church. MAHMUD HAMS/AFP/Getty Images Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom March 2012 (Covering April 1, 2011 – February 29, 2012) Commissioners Leonard A. Leo Chair Dr. Don Argue Dr. Elizabeth H. Prodromou Vice Chairs Felice D. Gaer Dr. Azizah al-Hibri Dr. Richard D. Land Dr. William J. Shaw Nina Shea Ted Van Der Meid Ambassador Suzan D. Johnson Cook, ex officio, non-voting member Ambassador Jackie Wolcott Executive Director Professional Staff David Dettoni, Director of Operations and Outreach Judith E. Golub, Director of Government Relations Paul Liben, Executive Writer John G. Malcolm, General Counsel Knox Thames, Director of Policy and Research Dwight Bashir, Deputy Director for Policy and Research Elizabeth K. Cassidy, Deputy Director for Policy and Research Scott Flipse, Deputy Director for Policy and Research Sahar Chaudhry, Policy Analyst Catherine Cosman, Senior Policy Analyst Deborah DuCre, Receptionist Tiffany Lynch, Senior Policy Analyst Jacqueline A. Mitchell, Executive Coordinator U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom 800 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 790 Washington, DC 20002 202-523-3240, 202-523-5020 (fax) www.uscirf.gov Annual Report of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom March 2012 (Covering April 1, 2011 – February 29, 2012) Table of Contents Overview of Findings and Recommendations……………………………………………..1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………..1 Countries of Particular Concern and the Watch List…………………………………2 Overview of CPC Recommendations and Watch List……………………………….6 Prisoners……………………………………………………………………………..12 USCIRF’s Role in IRFA Implementation…………………………………………………14 Selected Accomplishments…………………………………………………………..15 Engaging the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom of the Media in Turkey and the Killing of Hrant Dink
    FREEDOM OF THE MEDIA IN TURKEY AND THE KILLING OF HRANT DİNK TRIAL OBSERVATION REPORT September 2007 FREEDOM OF THE MEDIA IN TURKEY AND THE KILLING OF HRANT DİNK TRIAL OBSERVATION REPORT SEPTEMBER 2007 KURDISH HUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT BAR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE OF ENGLAND AND WALES INDEX ON CENSORSHIP ARTICLE 19 Acknowledgments This report was researched and written on behalf of the Kurdish Human Rights Project (KHRP), the Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales (BHRC), Index on Censorship and Article 19 by Edel Hughes, Junior Lecturer in Law, Centre for Criminal Justice, University of Limerick and KHRP Advisory Group Member Louise Christian. It was edited by Rachel Bernu, Walter Jayawardene, Mustafa Gündoğdu and Amy Pepper (KHRP). The authors are grateful to the following individuals and organisations for their cooperation and assistance in this project: Fethiye Çetin, lawyer for the Dink family; Murat Çelikkan of the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly; Hakan Gündüz and Yaşar Aydın of TOHAV (The Foundation for Legal and Social Studies) and Şaban Dayanan from the Istanbul Branch of İHD. The authors would also like to thank their interpreter Abdulcelil Kaya. KHRP gratefully acknowledges the support of The Big Lottery Fund (UK), Irish Aid (Ireland), The Sigrid Rausing Trust (UK), The Corner House (UK), Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland (Finland), Oak Foundation (USA), Bishop’s Subcommission for Misereor (Germany), Oakdale Trust (UK), Rowan Charitable Trust (UK), Stiching Cizera Botan (Netherlands). Layout & Design: Torske & Sterling Legal
    [Show full text]
  • Hrant Dink Murder Case
    FOURTH-YEAR REPORT ON HRANT DINK’S MURDER Attn. Fethiye Çetin In our previous reports, we had discussed the process having paid the way to Hrant Dink’s murder as well as individuals and organisations that played a role in this process, the real perpetrators of the crime and the reasons behind the murder; we had also raised questions regarding the subject and given potential answers. As of today our answers - being shaped up by the progress made at the proceedings, the content of the case files, the evidence generated from those files, inquiries and investigations conducted outside this case and the ECHR judgment - do form the basis of our opinion about the substance of the case. In the 3rd year report, we had made the following statement: “It would not be an exaggeration to note that we are back to square one 3 years after the murder. However, despite the lack of any considerable progress in revealing the actual perpetrators of the murder by the end of these three years, the process that paved the way for the murder and the developments that took place in the following three years present significant evidence on who the perpetrator or perpetrators may be. It brings us closer to answers to the questions we posed in the report of the second year. Failure to solve the murder despite the operations of psychological war and action plans revealed by some investigations and trials particularly in the current process we have been going through, as well as the statements that “*murder+ will be investigated until the end” and hundreds of pages
    [Show full text]
  • Pen International Writers in Prison Committee Caselist
    PEN INTERNATIONAL WRITERS IN PRISON COMMITTEE CASELIST January-December 2013 PEN International Writers in Prison Committee 50/51 High Holborn London WC1V 6ER United Kingdom Tel: + 44 020 74050338 Fax: + 44 020 74050339 e-mail: [email protected] web site: www.pen-international.org PEN INTERNATIONAL CHARTER The P.E.N. Charter is based on resolutions passed at its International Congresses and may be summarised as follows: P.E.N. affirms that: 1. Literature knows no frontiers and must remain common currency among people in spite of political or international upheavals. 2. In all circumstances, and particularly in time of war, works of art, the patrimony of humanity at large, should be left untouched by national or political passion. 3. Members of P.E.N. should at all times use what influence they have in favour of good understanding and mutual respect between nations; they pledge themselves to do their utmost to dispel race, class and national hatreds, and to champion the ideal of one humanity living in peace in one world. 4. P.E.N. stands for the principle of unhampered transmission of thought within each nation and between all nations, and members pledge themselves to oppose any form of suppression of freedom of expression in the country and community to which they belong, as well as throughout the world wherever this is possible. P.E.N. declares for a free press and opposes arbitrary censorship in time of peace. It believes that the necessary advance of the world towards a more highly organized political and economic order renders a free criticism of governments, administrations and institutions imperative.
    [Show full text]
  • Grapes of Wrath
    #6.13 PERSPECTIVES Political analysis and commentary from Turkey THE TRANSFORMATION OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL AREAS IN TURKEY GRAPES OF WRATH DEMOCRACY FOREIGN POLICY HUMAN LANDSCAPES The Gezi Park Resistance Objective versus Process in Turkey’s Memet Aksoy: and the Peace Process EU Membership Bid This is What Being an Artist is: Nazan Üstündağ Erhan İçener Taking Sides Page 54 Page 62 Ayşegül Oğuz Page 66 TURKEY REPRESENTATION Contents From the editor 3 ■ Cover story: The transformation of agriculture and rural areas in Turkey The dynamics of agricultural and rural transformation in post-1980 Turkey Murat Öztürk 4 Europe’s rural policies a la carte: The right choice for Turkey? Gökhan Günaydın 11 The liberalization of Turkish agriculture and the dissolution of small peasantry Abdullah Aysu 14 Agriculture: Strategic documents and reality Ali Ekber Yıldırım 22 Land grabbing Sibel Çaşkurlu 26 A real life “Grapes of Wrath” Metin Özuğurlu 31 ■ Ecology Save the spirit of Belgrade Forest! Ünal Akkemik 35 Child poverty in Turkey: Access to education among children of seasonal workers Ayşe Gündüz Hoşgör 38 Urban contexts of the june days Şerafettin Can Atalay 42 ■ Democracy Is the Ergenekon case a step towards democracy? Orhan Gazi Ertekin 44 Participative democracy and active citizenship Ayhan Bilgen 48 Forcing the doors of perception open Melda Onur 51 The Gezi Park Resistance and the peace process Nazan Üstündağ 54 Marching like Zapatistas Sebahat Tuncel 58 ■ Foreign Policy Objective versus process: Dichotomy in Turkey’s EU membership bid Erhan İcener 62 ■ Culture Rural life in Turkish cinema: A location for innocence Ferit Karahan 64 ■ Human Landscapes from Turkey This is what being an artist is: Taking Sides Memet Aksoy 66 ■ News from HBSD 69 Heinrich Böll Stiftung - Turkey Represantation The Heinrich Böll Stiftung, associated with the German Green Party, is a legally autonomous and intellectually open political foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Who's Who in Politics in Turkey
    WHO’S WHO IN POLITICS IN TURKEY Sarıdemir Mah. Ragıp Gümüşpala Cad. No: 10 34134 Eminönü/İstanbul Tel: (0212) 522 02 02 - Faks: (0212) 513 54 00 www.tarihvakfi.org.tr - [email protected] © Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 2019 WHO’S WHO IN POLITICS IN TURKEY PROJECT Project Coordinators İsmet Akça, Barış Alp Özden Editors İsmet Akça, Barış Alp Özden Authors Süreyya Algül, Aslı Aydemir, Gökhan Demir, Ali Yalçın Göymen, Erhan Keleşoğlu, Canan Özbey, Baran Alp Uncu Translation Bilge Güler Proofreading in English Mark David Wyers Book Design Aşkın Yücel Seçkin Cover Design Aşkın Yücel Seçkin Printing Yıkılmazlar Basın Yayın Prom. ve Kağıt San. Tic. Ltd. Şti. Evren Mahallesi, Gülbahar Cd. 62/C, 34212 Bağcılar/İstanbull Tel: (0212) 630 64 73 Registered Publisher: 12102 Registered Printer: 11965 First Edition: İstanbul, 2019 ISBN Who’s Who in Politics in Turkey Project has been carried out with the coordination by the History Foundation and the contribution of Heinrich Böll Foundation Turkey Representation. WHO’S WHO IN POLITICS IN TURKEY —EDITORS İSMET AKÇA - BARIŞ ALP ÖZDEN AUTHORS SÜREYYA ALGÜL - ASLI AYDEMİR - GÖKHAN DEMİR ALİ YALÇIN GÖYMEN - ERHAN KELEŞOĞLU CANAN ÖZBEY - BARAN ALP UNCU TARİH VAKFI YAYINLARI Table of Contents i Foreword 1 Abdi İpekçi 3 Abdülkadir Aksu 6 Abdullah Çatlı 8 Abdullah Gül 11 Abdullah Öcalan 14 Abdüllatif Şener 16 Adnan Menderes 19 Ahmet Altan 21 Ahmet Davutoğlu 24 Ahmet Necdet Sezer 26 Ahmet Şık 28 Ahmet Taner Kışlalı 30 Ahmet Türk 32 Akın Birdal 34 Alaattin Çakıcı 36 Ali Babacan 38 Alparslan Türkeş 41 Arzu Çerkezoğlu
    [Show full text]
  • TURKEY Human Rights Defenders, Guilty Until Proven Innocent International Fact-Finding Mission Report ˙ I HD ©
    TURKEY HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS, GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT International Fact-Finding Mission Report HD ˙ I © May 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 1. Cemal Bektas in his cell 2. Pinar Selek Acronyms ............................................................................................................................... 4 3. Ragıp Zarakolu 4. Executive Summary ...............................................................................................................5 Muharrem Erbey and other activists on December 26, Introduction: objective and methodology of the mission .................................................7 2009 before the hearing that confirmed the charges I. Political context: Recent institutional reforms and policies have against 152 Kurdish figures. so far failed to address Turkey’s authoritarian tendencies ................................................ 9 Contrary to the principle of presumption of innocence, II. Malfunctioning political and judicial systems .................................................................. 15 the media was informed of A. The international legal framework: a good ratification record ................................. 15 the hearing and this photo 1. The protection of freedom of association ................................................................ 15 was broadly published in the 2. The protection of freedom of expression .................................................................. 16 media. B. The domestic legal and institutional framework: a deficient framework ................
    [Show full text]
  • Bia Media Monitoring 2009 / Annual Report
    BİA MEDIA MONITORING 2009 / ANNUAL REPORT According to the 2009 annual report published by the BİA Media Monitoring Desk, a total of 323 people stood trial in the context of freedom of thought in 2009, among them 123 journalists. The report comprises the cases and struggles of 978 people. Violations of freedom of expression are divided into seven sections: "Attacks and Threats", "Arrests and Detentions", "Trials concerning Press Freedom and Freedom of Expression", "Corrections and Legal Redress", "European Court of Human Rights", "Reactions to Censorship" and "Implementations of RTÜK". While the report makes no claim to be complete, it aims at giving an impression of the variety and intensity of targetting press freedom and freedom of expression. Attacks and Threats A group of 15 young leftists protested against the arrest of 3 friends in the city centre of Edirne in the north- western region of Thrace on 27 December. Their friends had been taken into custody for alleged membership of an illegal organization. A crowd of about 750 people physically attacked the young protesters and shouted slogans like "This is Edirne, there is no traitor here" and "Down with the PKK". In a press release, the young leftists demanded the USA to withdraw from the İncirlik base in Adana and the detainees to be released. They also initiated a signature campaign in the same context. The police were not able to take the situation under control. 6 people were injured in the course of the incident. Conscientious objector Enver Aydemir claims that he was exposed to torture and maltreatment in prison for refusing to wear military clothes on 26 December.
    [Show full text]
  • Hrant Dink Murder Case
    TO THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF (14TH) HIGH CRIMINAL COURT OF ISTANBUL File No: 2007/428 ATTENDEES : 1) Rahil Dink- Domicile address is included in the file 2) Hasrof Dink- Domicile address is included in the file 3) Delal Dink- Domicile address is included in the file 4) Arat Dink- Domicile address is included in the file 5) Sera Dink- Domicile address is included in the file ATTORNEYS : The names, surnames and signatures of attorneys are given below DEFENDANTS : 1) ERHAN TUNCEL – Under arrest 2) YASİN HAYAL – Under arrest nd 3) OGÜN SAMAST – Under arrest (pending trial at the 2 Juvenile High Criminal Court of Istanbul) 4) ZEYNEL ABİDİN YAVUZ 5) ERSİN YOLCU 6) AHMET İSKENDER 7) TUNCAY UZUNDAL 8) SALİH HACISALİHOĞLU 9) VEYSEL TOPRAK 10) OSMAN ALPAY 11) İRFAN ÖZKAN 12) MUSTAFA ÖZTÜRK 13) ŞENOL AKDUMAN 14) NUMAN ŞİŞMAN 15) ALPER ESİRGEMEZ 16) ERBİL SUSAMAN 17) YAŞAR CİHAN 18) HALİS EGEMEN 19) OSMAN HAYAL 20) COŞKUN İĞCİ PLACE AND DATE OF THE CRIME : Istanbul and Trabzon, 19.01.2007 and the period before 1 OUR OPINION ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE - I - INTRODUCTION The trial process ongoing for more than four years as well as the various sections of the opinion submitted by the prosecution have undeniably confirmed that our allegation - “the defendants of this case are only the Trabzon leg of the large and professional organization that committed the murder of Hrant Dink” - is not merely an intangible assumption but it points out to the truth. The process has clearly revealed the roles and responsibilities of all governmental/political actors, from the General Staff to the judicial authorities, from government spokespersons to law enforcement authorities and from the media to paramilitary forces, in the murder of Hrant Dink, in the failure to prevent the murder, and in the failure to identify the actual perpetrators.
    [Show full text]
  • Judgement at Istanbul
    JANUARY 21, 2012 THE ARMENIAN Mirror -Spe ctator NOW IN ITS 80TH YEAR Volume LXXXII, NO. 28, Issue 4222 $ 2.00 NEWS IN BRIEF The First English Language Armenian Weekly in the United States Since 1932 Imprisoned Zarakolu Calls upon Turkey to Recognize Genocide ANKARA (news.am) — Ragip Zarakolu, the Turkish Human Rights defender and director of Belge Publishing House, who is imprisoned on charges of helping Kurdish separatists, forwarded, through his attorney, a petition to the Turkish parliament, ask - ing the latter to recognize the Armenian Genocide. In his letter, Zarakolu noted that the 100th anniversary of the Genocide is approaching, yet the policy of denial is continuing and that the concept of “if necessary, we will do it again” is being reflect - ed. “Yes, Turkey must face its history. This is not only an obligation before the martyrs, but also a duty for the public . A fundamental apology is very important for 1915. Its place must be the parlia - ment of Turkey. It will not debase Turkey, but rather strengthen and elevate it,” according to Hrant Dink’s widow, Rakel, with supporters outside the courthouse. ( photo) Today’s Zaman Demokrathaber website of Turkey. “At this time, when the 100th anniversary of the 1915 Genocide is approaching, the Republic of Turkey must apologize to the martyrs and its citi - Turkish Court Jails Man behind Dink Murder zens alike,” according to Zarakolu’s letter. Belge Publishing House has published numerous Yasin Hayal, Accused Mastermind, books on the Armenian Genocide and Zarakolu vis - Sentenced to Life in Prison ited Armenia in February 2011 to pick up a state award.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights Watch
    HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH WORLD REPOR T | 2013 EVENTS OF 2012 H U M A N R I G H T S WATCH WORLD REPORT 2013 EVENTS OF 2012 Copyright © 2013 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN-13: 978-1-60980-389-6 Front cover photo: Syria – A mother and son anguished over the loss of her other two sons, killed by a mortar attack launched by the Syrian army. Homs province, February 20, 2012. © 2012 Alessio Romenzi Back cover photo: Greece – Ali Mohammadi, a 25-year-old Afghan asylum seeker who was attacked by thugs in Athens, Greece, in March 2011. © 2011 Zalmaï for Human Rights Watch Cover and book design by Rafael Jiménez www.hrw.org Human Rights Watch is dedicated to protecting the human rights of people around the world. We stand with victims and activists to prevent discrimination, to uphold political freedom, to protect people from inhumane conduct in wartime, and to bring offenders to justice. We investigate and expose human rights violations and hold abusers accountable. We challenge governments and those who hold power to end abusive practices and respect international human rights law. We enlist the public and the international community to support the cause of human rights for all. WORLD REPORT 2013 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH Human Rights Watch is one of the world’s leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes.
    [Show full text]